هل تعتبر الصور والفيديوهات المنتجة في برنامج الذكاء الصناعي جات جي بي تي اعمال ذات قيمة فنية؟
Firstly you need to define what you have done. Whether you call this Art or any other name will not detract or add to its worth.
The question is not whether images and videos generated by ChatGpt meet the criteria of art, but who in this case is the artist?
Tomaž Krpič Surely the artist is the person who conceives and administers the creative process, despite the tools and methods used, as in artistic work generated by algorithms.
Michael John Chapman I afraid, I am not very good in giving the answers, even/especially to my own questions, but I can deliver another pair of questions regarding artist's creative relation to tools and methods. When comparing chisel or paintbrush to the ChatGpt, when used as a mean with which to make an artwork, does your answer suggest that there is no difference between them, neither how they are made (by chisel/ ChatGpt maker ...) or how they are used in the production of work of art?
Tomaž Krpič : Art in itself is not holy. The creative process is envolved with the construction of an "unknown object" [we cannot predict the end result] in which the original premises of the idea that stimulated the work are challenged by handling tools used to modify the physical material, to the obtention of intermediary results, thus providing feedback, which can be appreciated and analysed throughout the "event" [process of creation]. In the case of AI, we can appreciate the relevance and quality of the criteria that make up the algorhythms that generate the "Art"
Tomaž Krpič That is both a technical and philosophical question. Perhaps too complex to discuss here - Maybe it could be "Chat" and "Chisel"
Whether ChatGpt is inteligent or it is not. If it is, than it is capable of creating its own unique solutions to the problems. At lest occasionally. And for instance in art. That means that ChatGpt is a subject. I do not know if that is enough to have its own will, but it certainly 'smells' like it. Than, it can be recognized as a creator of artworks, this is the outcome of its creations can be considered art. If ChatGpt is not inteligent and it is only a cleverly designed software, which use (steal?) art works in order to create 'new' artworks, than it is merely a high technological 'chisel', which outcome is not art at all. It can have aesthetical characteristics to the people and they can believe it si art, but it is not. Art is a distinct communicational situation where art work is used to send symbolic meaning among at least two subjects. Etc. :-)
Artificial intelligence is still incapable of absolute creativity without returning to the human artistic heritage and modifying it. It is incapable of presenting the pure artistic model, and I mean (originality in art).
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Writing